list_zones

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description does not need to cover those. However, it adds no additional behavioral context like pagination behavior or result ordering, which would be helpful beyond the schema. It does not contradict annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, clear sentence with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and instantly understandable.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given there is no output schema, the description should hint at return format or include guidance on handling large lists (e.g., pagination). It does not mention the fetch_all parameter or how results are structured, leaving the agent with incomplete information for proper usage.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema covers 60% of parameters with descriptions, but the tool description only mentions name and status filters, omitting page, per_page, and fetch_all. The description adds no new semantic value beyond what the schema provides for name and status, and fails to explain pagination, which is a significant gap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool lists zones (domains) with optional filtering. It uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('zones'), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_zone, delete_zone, and get_zone.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description indicates filtering by name or status but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as get_zone for detailed info. It is implied that this is the default list tool for zones, but lacks when-not-to-use or comparison with similar list tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.